People usually experience a great deal of emotional pain when a
romantic relationship ends. It is not uncommon for people to refer to
'scars' when discussing a breakup, as if the experience was so
painful, and the healing process so difficult, that it left a lasting
mark just as a physical injury does. Of course, some breakups are more
painful than others. Occasionally, breakup from a romantic relationship
causes no lasting heartache, and recovery is reported to be relatively
painless and easy. Many factors likely influence the extent to which
people suffer after a breakup, and researchers have uncovered a number
of them.

Much of the research on recovering from a breakup has focused on
recovery after a divorce. Wang and Amato (2000), for example, found that
adjusting to divorce was associated with being the person who initiated
the divorce, having a favorable attitude toward divorce beforehand,
having a higher income, and dating a new person steadily or remarrying.
Interestingly, stress (as measured by income decline, loss of friends,
moving, etc.) did not make adjusting to divorce more difficult, except
among people who were unemployed.

Kitson (1982) found that lingering feelings of emotional attachment
to the ex-spouse is another powerful cause of distress during and after
divorce, with gender differences apparent at different stages. Women
experience more distress during the initial separation, but men
experience more distress from the divorce itself (Riessman &
Gerstel, 1985). Women and men also have different coping styles when it
comes to recovering. Women are more likely to discuss problems and
emotions with close friends, while men tend to avoid such discussions
and instead focus on beginning another relationship (Sorenson, Russell,
Harkness, & Harvey, 1993).

Other research has examined emotional recovery from romantic
relationship breakups between people who were not married. A great deal
of this research has focused on attachment style as a moderator of the
impact of a breakup (e.g., Davis, Shaver, & Vernon, 2003; Feeney,
& Noller, 1992; Pistole, 1995). Davis et al. (2003), for example,
found that people with an anxious attachment style have the most
difficulty dealing with a breakup, and people with a secure attachment
style are more likely to seek social support to cope with loss.

Sbarra (2006) examined factors that predicted how quickly people
recovered from their sadness and anger after a breakup. Emotional
recovery was defined as a point in time when the individual felt as good
(for three successive days without relapse) as a comparison group of
participants in an intact relationship. Results of the study revealed
that sadness recovery was hindered by a preoccupied attachment style,
difficulty in accepting that the relationship was over, a high level of
love for the partner, and a high level of anger toward the partner.
Anger recovery was hindered by a non-secure attachment style and
feelings of sadness.

Given the broad range of situational factors that could influence
how rapidly a person recovers from a breakup, it is useful to begin to
further identify which factors are most influential and whether they
account for unique variance when multiple factors are considered
simultaneously. Our focus was basic situational or behavioral factors
that concerned the romantic relationship itself, rather than personality
variables or general attitudes about relationships. As our interest is
primarily in a person's self reported perception of recovery, we
examined variables that may be related to positive or negative
cognitions or behaviors concerning a breakup. Our choice of predictors
was guided both by prior research that has provided evidence that a
given variable is related to recovery from a breakup (including those
related to recovery from divorce) or situational factors that co-occur
with a breakup that have not yet been fully investigated but could
reasonably be expected to have some influence. These variables are as
follows.

Initiator status. Initiating a breakup probably leaves one more
vulnerable to feelings of guilt, but it may lead to less self doubt than
does being the target of a breakup. It is thus feasible that initiators
recover from breakups more quickly than non-initiators. Wang and Amato
(2000) found that those who initiate divorce adjust better than those
who do not; however, Pettit and Bloom (1984) found that this difference
was trivial 6 months after the divorce. Sbarra (2006) did not replicate
Wang and Amato's (2000) finding with dating relationships (rather
than marriages), although Hill, Rubin, and Peplau (1976) did find that
initiators were less distressed than those whose dating partners
initiated the breakup. Helgeson (1994) found that men adjusted better to
a breakup if they were the initiators, but initiator status was
unrelated to women's adjustment. Based on these mixed findings, the
role of initiator status in recovering from a breakup remains unclear.
Hill et al. (1976) found that former couples do not even always agree on
who broke up with whom. We would expect that, if initiator status plays
a role at all, it may predict recovery for men, but not for women.

Social support. In a number of studies, receiving social support
from friends and loved ones after an important relationship has ended
has been found to aid in emotional recovery from the loss (e.g., Sansom
& Farnill, 1997). Indeed, one of the reasons offered for
women's tendency to suffer less than men after the breakup of a
dating relationship (Choo, Levine, & Hatfield, 1996; Helgeson, 1994;
Hill et al., 1976) or divorce (Bloom & Caldwell, 1981) is that women
tend to have more extensive social support networks than men, who
instead rely heavily on romantic partners for their social support
(Tschann, 1988; Veroff, 1981). Interestingly, Moller, Fouladi, McCarthy,
and Hatch (2003) found that after controlling for attachment style,
perceptions of social support from family and friends did not account
for additional variance in the adjustment to a dating relationship
breakup. However, social connectedness, defined as "the degree of
interpersonal closeness that an individual experiences in his or her
social world," (Moller et al., 2003, p. 358) did add additional
benefits. Finally, social support may serve as a buffer to rumination
after a loss. Nolen-Hoeksema and Davis (1999) found that people who tend
to ruminate about their negative emotions after the death of a loved one
are not only more likely to seek social support after the loss but also
benefit more from that social support.

Contact with ex-partner after the breakup. The logic behind
inclusion of this variable might be summarized by the saying, "Out
of sight, out of mind." If people have contact with an ex-partner,
either out of choice or because they work with or have deeply connected
social networks with their ex-partner, they may have more difficulty
extinguishing negative feelings about their ex-partner and thus have
more trouble recovering from the breakup.

Number of previous relationships. While there is no prior research
examining this variable, we reasoned that the number of relationships
people had prior to the breakup in question may signal how easily
participants might expect to find another romantic partner. People who
have had many previous relationships might reason that they will have
little trouble meeting someone new, while people who have had few
relationships might anticipate difficulty in finding a new partner. For
some individuals, belief that they can begin a new relationship more
easily may be related to better adjustment to a breakup (e.g.,
Spielmann, MacDonald, & Wilson, 2009).

How long the relationship lasted. The length of time a relationship
lasted has been little-studied as a predictor of ease of recovery, but
is potentially a powerful predictor. The longer people are in a romantic
relationship the more it seems likely that they would rely on their
partner to fulfill their day-to-day emotional needs as well as their
more concrete goals and activity needs. The degree of disruption of such
goals and needs has been found to lead to more severe negative reactions
after a breakup (Berscheid, 1983; Berscheid, Snyder, & Omoto, 1989).
Related to this, the longer people are in a relationship, the more their
thoughts will include their partner. For people who have only been
dating a few weeks, many aspects of their lives may not involve their
dating partner. After a breakup, it may be much more difficult to avoid
negative thoughts about an ex-partner if many of a person's
memories and daily routines are entwined with that ex-partner.

Contact with partner during the relationship. Some people who are
romantically involved may only date a few times a week, while others
live together, work together, and spend all of their leisure time
together. In an analysis of predictors of breakup, Felmlee, Sprecher,
and Bassin (1990) found that the amount of time spent together was
negatively correlated with the breakup of romantically involved
partners. Therefore, it is feasible that the more time people spend with
their partner on a daily basis, the more difficult it will be to recover
from a breakup, as many of their daily activities will be linked to
their partner.

How much in love. The research on love in romantic relationships
suggests that love may be a better predictor of recovery from breakup
for men than for women. When it comes to love, men fall faster
(Baumeister & Tice, 2001; Peplau & Gordon, 1985), tend to be
more romantic (Sprecher & Metts, 1989), and tend to be less
practical (Frazier & Esterly, 1990; Hendrick & Hendrick, 1995;
Sprecher & Toro-Morn, 2002) than women, although these differences
in beliefs about love may be waning (Sprecher & Toro-Morn, 2002).
Sprecher and Metts (1989) assessed romantic beliefs and found that men
scored higher than women in the belief that love conquers all, the
existence of a soul mate, one's partner is ideal, and love at first
sight. Sprecher and Toro-Morn (2002) found that American men scored
higher in the idealization of love but did not differ in their other
romantic beliefs (e.g., belief in soul mate).

How soon after the breakup the person began dating again. Wang and
Amato (2000) found that being in a new relationship or being remarried
was associated with emotional recovery from divorce, and Saffrey and
Ehrenberg (2007) found that beginning a new relationship was weakly
associated with better adjustment to a past breakup. Although romantic
relationships were not specifically examined, research by Millar,
Tesser, and Millar (1988) also provides some indication of the
relationship between finding a new relationship and recovery. Millar et
al. (1988) assessed the extent to which incoming university students
thought about people they had left behind upon coming to college and
found that people who had found substitutes for the people they had left
made the adjustment more easily. Spielmann et al. (2009) examined
emotional attachment to a prior partner as a function of attachment
style (anxious vs. secure). A notable finding was that, for individuals
that were still single, individuals with anxious attachment style had
greater emotional attachment to a prior partner than individuals with
secure attachment. There was no difference, however, as a function of
attachment style for those individuals that were in new relationships.
Conventional wisdom concerning the nature of loss suggests the need to
"work through" a loss before moving on (e.g., Wortman &
Silver, 1989), but arguments akin to "getting back in the
saddle" and "there are many fish in the sea" are also
prevalent. The studies noted above suggest there may be some benefit to
new relationships following a breakup and we therefore further examined
this within the context of the situational factors that could influence
breakup recovery.

The available literature suggests that a number of the variables
discussed above might be expected to be related to the length of time it
takes to recover from a romantic breakup. In addition, we examined
situational variables that have yet to be fully explored in the
literature, but could be expected to co-occur or be related to feelings
concerning a breakup (e.g., number of prior partners, length of the
relationship). No research, however, has investigated all of these
variables within the same study to determine the extent to which each
variable's predictive influence is redundant with others. The goals
of the present study are threefold: (a) first, to examine the extent
that variables shown to be related to recovery from divorce generalize
to other romantic relationships; (b) second, to investigate the extent
to which perceived situational factors are unique predictors of recovery
from a breakup; (c) and third, given that prior literature has shown
gender differences in terms of the relationship of certain variables to
recovery (Riessman & Gerstel, 1985; Sorenson et al., 1993), to
assess these predictors as a function of gender.

METHOD

Participants

A total of 267 undergraduate students from a southeastern
university participated in this study and received course credit or
extra credit in their Introduction to Psychology and Physiological
Psychology courses. Participants that had never experienced a romantic
relationship were instructed to simply answer the questions on the basis
of the ending of a close friendship. Their data were discarded (n = 30).
Of the 237 that indicated that they had experienced a breakup from a
romantic relationship, 89 indicated that they had not yet recovered from
the breakup of the romantic relationship in question. As we were
interested in predictors of recovery, those who indicated that they had
not yet recovered were excluded from analysis. Thirty-two additional
participants with missing data on the relevant criterion and predictor
variables were not included in the analysis. Therefore, regression
analysis was based on 116 participants with complete data on the
predictor variables and the criterion. There were 59 males, 55 females
and 2 that did not indicate gender (1). Ages ranged from 18 to 40 years
(M = 20.19, SD = 2.84). The sample consisted of 80 Caucasians, 27
African Americans, 1 biracial student, 5 that indicated
"Other" and two that did not indicate ethnicity. The majority
of our sample reported heterosexual orientation (n = 112); 1 student
reported bisexuality as his/her sexual orientation, 1 student reported
homosexuality as his/her sexual orientation, and 2 did not report sexual
orientation.

Materials and Procedure

Participants were asked to "Think of the most significant
romantic relationship that you've had that broke up." Survey
items assessed situational characteristics, behaviors and attitudes
associated with the relationship. First, students reported how long the
relationship had lasted in months. They also reported who broke up with
whom or whether the breakup was a mutual decision. Next, participants
reported how in love they had been, from 1 (Not at all) to 6 (Madly in
love). Students then reported how many people they spoke with about the
breakup within 24 hours of the breakup. Participants reported how often
they saw their ex-boyfriend/ girlfriend in the months before and after
the breakup, with each item rated as either Everyday, A few times a
week, A few times a month, or Rarely. Students were also asked how soon
after the breakup they began dating someone new and how long it took
them to recover completely (to feel as good as you felt before the
relationship began) from the breakup in months. Finally, students
reported how many other relationships they had had in the year before
dating the person with whom the significant breakup occurred.

RESULTS

The data were analyzed using multiple regression analysis. The
"number of previous relationships," "how long were you in
the relationship," "how often did you see your
boyfriend/girlfriend," "how soon you began dating again,"
"how many people did you talk to," "how often did you see
your boyfriend/girlfriend after," "how in love were you,"
and "who broke up with whom," were entered as predictors into
the model simultaneously. Who broke up with whom was dummy coded and
entered as a categorical predictor (Dummy variable 1 = initiator of
breakup coded 1, and Dummy Variable 2 = He/She broke up = 1). "Time
to recover from the relationship" was entered as the criterion
variable. Results revealed that the overall regression model was
significant, F(9, 106) = 8.53, p < .001. Examination of the slopes
for the individual predictors revealed that the amount of time spent in
the relationship ([beta] = .49, p < .001) and how quickly the
individual began dating again ([beta] = .39 p < .001) significantly
predicted time to recover from the breakup. No other predictors
contributed significantly to the model (see Table 1 for regression
coefficients). Forty-two percent of the variance in the data was
accounted for by the model, with a standard error of the estimate of
6.52.

To examine predictors as a function of gender, predictors were
entered simultaneously in separate models with "time to recover
from the relationship" as the criterion variable. For females, the
overall regression model was significant, F(9, 45) = 9.92, p < .001.
Examination of individual slopes revealed that the amount of time spent
in the relationship ([beta] = .64, p < .001), how often one saw her
partner during the relationship ([beta] = -.26, p < .01), and how
quickly the individual began dating again ([beta] = .31, p < .01),
were significant predictors in the model. No other predictors
contributed significantly to the model (see Table 2). Sixty-seven
percent of the variance in the data was accounted for by the model, with
a standard error of the estimate of 6.80.

For males, the overall regression model was also significant, F(9,
49) = 6.15, p < .001. Examination of the slopes revealed that how in
love an individual was ([beta]= .29, p < .05), how soon one began
dating again ([beta]= .43, p < .001), and how often one saw his
partner during the relationship ([beta]= .23, p < .05) were
significant predictors in the model (See Table 3). Fifty-three percent
of the variance in the data was accounted for by the model, with a
standard error of the estimate of 3.56.

DISCUSSION

The current study illustrated a number of interesting patterns.
Time to begin dating someone new significantly predicted recovery from
the breakup of a romantic relationship for the sample as a whole.
Relationship length was also related to recovery time, although the
examination of gender revealed that this variable was a significant
predictor for women, but not for men. Interestingly, how often one saw
their boyfriend/girlfriend in the months before the breakup was
significant for both women and men, but in opposite directions. For
women, this was negatively associated with time to recover, while for
men it was positively associated.

The finding that the longer one is in a relationship the longer the
recovery, is not surprising given the greater chances of associating the
relationship and partner with various settings, activities, goals,
thoughts, and feelings. After a relationship has ended, despite
one's attempt to avoid the ex, thoughts of the ex may be primed by
the environment, or intrude spontaneously.

Another interesting finding from this study is that how quickly a
person begins dating someone new is a robust predictor of recovery from
a breakup. This variable was a reliable predictor for the entire sample,
as well as across genders. The often-offered advice that one should take
time to process a loss before venturing back into the dating world may
be misguided, at least in terms of how people view their own recovery.
There are a number of factors that may account for this result. A new
partner may limit the extent to which an individual may focus on
negative thoughts concerning a new relationship or contribute to
positive behaviors such as increased social interaction. For example, in
the area of clinical psychology, a technique known as Behavioral
Activation can be used within the context of treatment of depression
(e.g., Hopko, Lejuez, Ruggiero, & Eifert, 2003).

Hopko et al. (2003) stated that:

Behavioral activation may be defined as a therapeutic process that
emphasizes structured attempts at engendering increases in overt
behaviors that are likely to bring the patient into contact with
reinforcing environmental contingencies and produce corresponding
improvements in thoughts, mood, and overall quality of life (p.
700).

In the present context, a breakup is likely to engender negative
feelings, moods, self-perceptions, etc. However, by entering a new
relationship, individuals are exposing themselves to an intimate
(presumably positive) relationship with another individual and
increasing the likelihood of social contact or activity. Thus, similar
to the definition of behavioral activation discussed above, by entering
the new relationship the individual is, via their behavior, enhancing
exposure to reinforcers in their environment. Of course, it is always
possible that the causal direction of this result runs in reverse: those
who are less traumatized by a breakup begin dating sooner, so caution in
interpreting this result is warranted.

Perhaps most interesting was the finding that, for females, how
often they saw their partner before the breakup was negatively related
to recovery, whereas the opposite was observed for males (i.e., how
often he saw his partner before breakup was associated with longer
recovery). Prior research has suggested that greater time spent with a
partner is associated with a lower likelihood of breakup, possibly
because time spent in a relationship is perceived as an investment in
the relationship (Felmlee, et al., 1990). Consequently, it would seem
that the greater time spent together would be related to slower
recovery, but that pattern was observed only for males. It is possible
that the seemingly counterintuitive finding for the females may be
related to differences in how the genders approach relationships. As
noted above, females take a more pragmatic approach whereas males still
tend to be somewhat more romantic in their beliefs about love (Sprecher
and Toro-Morn, 2002). Consequently, if a breakup occurs, it is possible
that females may be more adept at objectively assessing the positives
and negatives of the relationship and are better able to do so with
greater information (i.e., more time actually spent together).
Therefore, if the relationship ends, females may better cope as a
function of a more balanced viewpoint of the relationship, whereas males
may be clinging to their romanticized view of their partner. This may
also be reflected in the finding that how much in love was a significant
predictor for males, but not females.

Other situational variables, however, were not significantly
related to breakup recovery when the variables were considered as a
group, including some that have previously been found to predict breakup
recovery. In particular, the lack of any relationship between social
support and recovery is especially surprising. Lack of social support is
often cited as a central reason why men have more trouble adjusting to
divorce, yet having friends and family to talk to after a breakup seemed
to have little bearing on how long it took participants to recover from
their breakups in the present study.

With respect to the limitations of this research, it should be
noted again that these data were retrospective. Sbarra (2006) followed
participants as their breakups were happening, using an experience
sampling method, which allowed on-line judgments of emotional recovery
that were not subject to the judgmental biases and distortions of
retrospection. However, using a retrospective judgment did provide an
advantage: participants in the present study were asked to consider
their most significant breakup, rather than their last. This allowed us
to examine recovery from a breakup that was especially traumatic for
participants.

In regard to the finding that dating was related to shorter
recovery period, these results do not speak to the long-term outcome of
such an approach (e.g., whether dating more quickly would be related to
better quality relationships or long-term satisfaction in
relationships). Second, the participants in the present study were
relatively young and it could be argued that the results here might not
generalize to an older sample. While there may be a number of
differences between perceptions of younger versus older adults with
regard to relationship experiences, note, however, that this finding
does appear to converge with prior research regarding the benefits of
beginning a new relationship (Spielmann et al., 2009; Wang & Amato,
2000).

In summary, our aim was to identify the concrete, situational
variables that are related to recovery from a romantic breakup and both
cognitive and behavioral mechanisms have been proposed to account for
the findings. Subsequent research is needed to test these links
empirically. Furthermore, the practical application of the current
findings should be explored. For example, if the cognitive and/or
behavioral benefits of beginning a new relationship subsequent to a
break-up can be sufficiently elucidated, these findings could have a
broad range of applications (e.g., therapeutic). Research should also be
aimed at examining whether these variables relate not only to perception
of a breakup, but how they might be related to long-term outcomes such
as relationship stability or satisfaction. Further research could also
be aimed at assessing whether such findings generalize to other forms of
personal loss.

Sprecher, S., & Metts, S. (1989). Development of the Romantic
Beliefs Scale and examination of the effects of gender and gender-role
orientation. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 6, 387-411.

Sprecher, S., & Toro-Morn, M. (2002). A study of men and women
from different sides of Earth to determine if men are from Mars and
women are from Venus in their beliefs about love and romantic
relationships. Sex Roles, 46, 131-147.

(1) In addition to the analysis for a group as a whole (N = 116),
analyses were conducted separately for males and females. The analyses
for males and females were based on the participants that indicated
gender (n = 114).

TABLE 1 Model Coefficients & Standard Errors for the Overall Sample
Model B Std. Error Beta
Constant .85 3.27
How long were you .29 .05 .49 *
in the relationship?
How much in love .04 .54 .01
were you?
How many people -.05 .11 -.04
did you talk to?
How often did you -.47 .58 -.06
see your bf/gf?
How soon did you .55 .11 .39 *
begin dating?
How often did you -.47 .72 -.05
see him/her after?
# of previous -.42 .47 -.07
relationships in year
before dating bf/gf
Initiator of Breakup -.96 1.54 -.06
He/She was initiator 1.29 1.70 .07
of the breakup
[R.sup.2] = .42, * p < .001
TABLE 2 Model Coefficients & Standard Errors for Females
Model B Std. Error Beta
Constant 10.52 5.25
How long were you .47 .07 .64 **
in the relationship?
How much in love -.67 .83 -.08
were you?
How many people -.24 .21 -.11
did you talk to?
How often did you -2.88 .99 -.26 *
see your bf/gf?
How soon did you .58 .17 .31 *
begin dating?
How often did you -1.66 1.10 -.14
see him/her after?
# of previous .47 .69 .06
relationships in year
before dating bf/gf
Initiator of Breakup -1.72 2.49 -.08
He/She was initiator 3.18 2.94 .12
of the breakup
[R.sup.2] = .67, * p < .01, ** p < .001
TABLE 3 Model Coefficients & Standard Errors for Males
Model B Std. Error Beta
Constant -3.63 2.44
How long were you .06 .04 .18
in the relationship?
How much in love 1.09 .44 .29 *
were you?
How many people .13 .07 .19
did you talk to?
How often did you .89 .43 .23 *
see your bf/gf?
How soon did you .35 .08 .43 **
begin dating?
How often did you -.04 .56 -.01
see him/her after?
# of previous -.74 .40 -.20
relationships in year
before dating bf/gf
Initiator of Breakup -2.09 1.21 -.21
He/She was initiator -2.01 1.25 -.21
of the breakup
[R.sup.2] = .53, * p < .05, ** p < .001

COPYRIGHT 2010 North American Journal of Psychology
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.